iolation because it costs money to give away such services and thus they are price dumping to gain market share.

You see you need networks, staff, servers and all sorts of things going. So if the FTC does not go after AOL, it must change its definitions and issue an apology letter to Microsoft and

Should AOL be allowed to give away free Internet Services? Well, consider if you will the predatory pricing laws of our nation and anti-dumping rules. Do these apply to service businesses too? Should they?

It is against the law to sell stuff cheaper than it costs you to produce it in order to squeeze out competition and monopolize the market place right? After all is that not what AOL convinced the government that Microsoft was doing giving out free web browsers and bundling them into their operating systems?

Well once you produce software it is paid for in research and development and therefore it costs Microsoft nothing to give the consumer a free web browser, yet the Federal Terrorist Commission attacked them anyway since AOL had lobbyists in Washington DC and Senators in their pocket to get the government to attack Microsoft.

The case as everyone in the World knows is about the most ridiculous case the FTC ever tried to pass off as legitimate. Now the tables appear to be turned and AOL is attempting to give away free email services. Ah ha! This is predatory pricing at its worst, unlike the Microsoft case AOL really is in violation because it costs money to give away such services and thus they are price dumping to gain market share.

You see you need networks, staff, servers and all sorts of things going. So if the FTC does not go after AOL, it must change its definitions and issue an apology letter to Microsoft and p

oduce it in order to squeeze out competition and monopolize the market place right? After all is that not what AOL convinced the government that Microsoft was doing giving out free web browsers and bundling them into their operating systems?

Well once you produce software it is paid for in research and development and therefore it costs Microsoft nothing to give the consumer a free web browser, yet the Federal Terrorist Commission attacked them anyway since AOL had lobbyists in Washington DC and Senators in their pocket to get the government to attack Microsoft.

The case as everyone in the World knows is about the most ridiculous case the FTC ever tried to pass off as legitimate. Now the tables appear to be turned and AOL is attempting to give away free email services. Ah ha! This is predatory pricing at its worst, unlike the Microsoft case AOL really is in violation because it costs money to give away such services and thus they are price dumping to gain market share.

You see you need networks, staff, servers and all sorts of things going. So if the FTC does not go after AOL, it must change its definitions and issue an apology letter to Microsoft and

and development and therefore it costs Microsoft nothing to give the consumer a free web browser, yet the Federal Terrorist Commission attacked them anyway since AOL had lobbyists in Washington DC and Senators in their pocket to get the government to attack Microsoft.

The case as everyone in the World knows is about the most ridiculous case the FTC ever tried to pass off as legitimate. Now the tables appear to be turned and AOL is attempting to give away free email services. Ah ha! This is predatory pricing at its worst, unlike the Microsoft case AOL really is in violation because it costs money to give away such services and thus they are price dumping to gain market share.

You see you need networks, staff, servers and all sorts of things going. So if the FTC does not go after AOL, it must change its definitions and issue an apology letter to Microsoft and

>

The case as everyone in the World knows is about the most ridiculous case the FTC ever tried to pass off as legitimate. Now the tables appear to be turned and AOL is attempting to give away free email services. Ah ha! This is predatory pricing at its worst, unlike the Microsoft case AOL really is in violation because it costs money to give away such services and thus they are price dumping to gain market share.

You see you need networks, staff, servers and all sorts of things going. So if the FTC does not go after AOL, it must change its definitions and issue an apology letter to Microsoft and

iolation because it costs money to give away such services and thus they are price dumping to gain market share.

You see you need networks, staff, servers and all sorts of things going. So if the FTC does not go after AOL, it must change its definitions and issue an apology letter to Microsoft and pay all its legal fees to defend its self from the Federal Terrorist Commission.

Additionally it is obvious that AOL, which stands for American Online, wishes to give free email to people around the world to gain market share and share that information in all those emails with the Government or NSA. But you cannot have it both ways.

You cannot attack one company like Microsoft for a trumped up reason, only to allow another company like AOL to actually break the very law you purported that the first company (MS) did, which they actually did not do.

American Online must be fined for allowing free Internet Services or Free Email, after all it was their miss use of government and the FTCs abuse of power, which caused this whole issue in the first place? How about a level playing field? But then again the Federal Terrorist Commission; well, what would they know about that with all their Press Releases of utter hokum and their poppycock Public Relations? Consider this opinion in 2006.